Re: Pagano can't seem to find quotes, even ones he created himself

Glenn <GlennSheldon@xxxxxxx> wrote:

On Dec 14, 8:22 pm, macaddic...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (macaddicted)
wrote:
Glenn <GlennShel...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On Dec 14, 6:25 pm, macaddic...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (macaddicted)
wrote:
T Pagano <not.va...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

It wasn't Magesterial it was Curial. It makes a difference. The fact
that a subsequent Pope modified what the PBC said in your precious
document not more than 40 years later proves it was not infallible or
irrevocable.

The pronouncement the PBC made concerning Genesis 1-3 was made while
AND as a magisterial body and it has NOT been revoked.

1. The PBC was never formed as a magesterial body. It was formed in the
manner of and followed the same format as the Holy Office.

Can I get some verification of that?

"The PBC was established by Pope Leo XIII in the document Vigilantiae
studiique to undertake "the challenge of explaining and safeguarding" the
Scriptures (sec. 3). It was made an official arm of the Magisterium with
this statement, "Its work will have the happy result of providing the
Apostolic See with the opportunity to declare what ought to be inviolably
maintained by Catholics, what ought to be reserved for further research,
and what ought to be left for the judgment of each individual." (sec. 9)"
http://catholicbiblestudent.com/2008/02/early-responsa-of-pontifical-...
cal.html

Perhaps an arm is not part of the body...

"Pope St. Pius X made the rulings of the Commission a part of the
Magisterium, the supreme teaching authority of the Church."

http://www.rtforum.org/lt/lt94.html

I'm transcribing this from Catholic Principles for Interpreting
Scripture. Please forgive any typos:
<http://www.amazon.com/Catholic-Principles-Interpreting-Scripture-Interp
retation/dp/8876536175/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1260846877&sr=8-1>

The name, the Pontifical Biblical Commission, refers to two quite
different entities employed by the popes of this century to take a
concern for Catholic biblical scholarship. The original Biblical
Commission was established in 1902 by Pope Leo XIII with the task of
promoting biblical interpretation in harmony with his encyclical
_Providentissimus Deus_ and of guarding against false interpretations.
Because of new developments in the biblical sciences, Pope Leo wished to
relieve the Holy Office (now the Congregation for the Doctrine of the
Faith) of responsibility for decisions regarding Scripture, and to
entrust those decisions instead to a group specializing in the field.
The members of the Pontifical Biblical Commission were all Cardinals and
the commission functioned like other Congregations of the Curia. In
addition, the Commission employed the assistance of Scripture scholars
and theologians as consultors. In the years that followed the Biblical
Commission functioned as an organ of the Church's Magisterium, and its
decisions, once approved by the Pope, were binding like those of other
Congregations with concerned doctrine. The Commission began its activity
during the Catholic Church's vigorous reaction to Modernism, and its
decisions until 1940 had a decidedly defensive character, treating such
topics as source criticism (called "literary criticism"), authorship,
the integrity of the biblical books, dates of composition and the
historicity of biblical narratives. After Pope Pius XII's encyclical
_Divino Afflante Spiritu_ (1943), however, the perspective changed
significantly and the Biblical Commission began to support the
scientific study of Scripture. Clarifications were issued, indicating
that earlier decisions of the Commission were to be taken as responding
to a particular historical situation, and the Catholic scholars could
pursue their research and investigations in full freedom.

The point is that the fact that the decisions handed down by the PBC
were not infallible or irrevocable.

I doubt this book is "infallible" either, but I don't see the
verification that the Commission was not a "magisterial body".

Sigh. It is self-evident, as it isn't a Council (eg Vatican I) or Ex
Cathedra statement, that it isn't "infallible." I figured I wouldn't
have to state the obvious.

Establish this before you go on to further claims about infallibility
and such. Your source claims "In the years that followed the Biblical
Commission functioned as an organ of the Church's Magisterium".

But that's where things go off the rails. Just because a doctrine is
promulgated as Magisterial does not mean that it is infallible.


Your claim that the Commission was formed "in the manner of and
followed the same format as the Holy Office" also seems false. The
Commission is now within the CDF.

Which is the second form, the one I didn't think I needed to enter as it
had no bearing on Pagano's claims regarding the PBC in 1909.

Once again, your source seems to
contradict your claim: "Pope Leo wished to relieve the Holy Office
(now the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) of responsibility
for decisions regarding Scripture, and to entrust those decisions
instead to a group specializing in the field."

Um, ok.

The issue here isn't whether or not the documents put forth by the PBC
before Divino were Magisterial but whether they were irrevocable. The
very issuance of Divino, a Papal encyclical, showed that PBC documents
were revocable. Two examples that relate to texts here are the
historical nature of Gen. 1-3 and the Mosaic authorship of the
Pentateuch.

In the first case Catholics teach that Gen 1-3 has a historical
character, but is not a "history" work (in the modern, or even ancient
Roman or Greek sense--See Divino) but carries a historicity. In this
specific case we believe that God created the world but that the precise
method of that creation is not described in the biblical text.

In the second case the JEPD source is readily accepted in the authorship
of the Pentateuch. A great example is the chiastic structure in the Noah
epic. For an example of the structure see:
<http://www.examiner.com/x-8276-Methodist-Examiner~y2009m7d31-Bible-Inte
rpretation-101--What-is-a-chiasm>

The Noachian epic contains two sources (J & P IIRC, but don't hold me to
it.) They have been brought together into their current form by a
Redactor, who formed the chiasm. The story moves, step by step, building
to that wonderful moment in Gen 8:1 "And God remembered Noah." Each step
to that point is reflected, in order, until as we began with Noah we are
left with Noah.

There are many dogmatic statements in the Church. But not every official
statement made by the Church is necessarily dogmatic and thus
unchageable.


--
macaddicted
Wisdom is radiant and unfading and she is easily discerned
by those who love her and is found by those who seek her.
Wisdom 6:12 (NRSV)

.

Relevant Pages